Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Windows, ODBC drivers and strange points ...

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Marten Feldtmann" <m(dot)feldtmann(at)t-online(dot)de>
Cc: <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Windows, ODBC drivers and strange points ...
Date: 2005-11-18 09:52:25
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4E7E12A@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-odbc
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marten Feldtmann [mailto:m(dot)feldtmann(at)t-online(dot)de] 
> Sent: 17 November 2005 17:05
> To: Dave Page
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] Windows, ODBC drivers and strange points ...
> 
> The same test I desribed in the first posting
> 
> We have a table like:
> 
> create table "TPERSON" ("ALLCSTVIEW" CHAR(1))
> 
> and does a select *  from  ... and opens
> a cursor for the result and queries all
> columns the following way:
> 
> Now IBM Smalltalk calls OdbcSQLDescribeCol
> and gets 1 for this column as size in the
> return parameter cbPrecision.
> 
> And with an alternate call it queries
> via OdbcSQLColAttribute  with parameter
> Sql_Column_Length  and this returns 3.

Well, I don't know how Smalltalk is renaming things, but if I use
SQL_DESC_LENGTH, I get 1 as expected. I do get 3 is if I use
SQL_DESC_OCTET_LENGTH. The spec says:

----
This SQLINTEGER record field contains the length, in bytes, of a
character string or binary data type. For fixed-length character or
binary types, this is the actual length in bytes. For variable-length
character or binary types, this is the maximum length in bytes. This
value always excludes space for the null-termination character for
implementation descriptors and always includes space for the
null-termination character for application descriptors. For application
data, this field contains the size of the buffer.
----

psqlODBC is returning the size using pgtype_transfer_octet_length()
which it goes to great lengths to calculate. I'm not sure I fully
understand why it's doing what it does, and frankly I'm wary of changing
it as it was written by Hiroshi Inoue who definitely understood the spec
better than I do!!

Can anyone else comment on this?

Regards, Dave.

pgsql-odbc by date

Next:From: Leendert Paul DiterwichDate: 2005-11-18 14:04:44
Subject: Update: Visual Studio 2005 not happy with postgresql
Previous:From: noreplyDate: 2005-11-17 14:57:03
Subject: [ psqlodbc-Bugs-1000422 ] Couldn't compile 08.01.0101 with Unix PG 7.4.5 development environment

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group